[Gladstone]

The HFI-780 wouldn't be a bad choice imho. The PRO 750 is nice, but really more of a studio tool.

Also please start getting it right people. Sibilance isn't caused by (bad) headphones but by bad recordings (mixes/masters).

Ofcourse I could always recommend you the Edition 9. You might actually save money with it cause your hunger for something better will most likely stop.

 

[Ross]

I have the 750s and think they sound just awful, a weird soundstage, metallic highs, recessed mids - inaccurate and un-musical (Peter Pinna, don't bother responding, we all know what you will say). I note above that they have the same drivers as the Edition 9. I wonder if someone who hates the 750s might still like the Edition 9?

 

[genclaymore]

I would say the HFI-780, how the pro/pro line was explain worried me, and I saw people who didnt like teh pro750 and liked the 780 and the other way around etc. Only reason I got the HFi-780 because I had plans which effected me not being able to get the pro750.

In a way I glad I didnt, I worried I wouldnt had liked the 750 and wishing I didnt get it. Because from what peter was saying about the bass, it reminded me of the AD700's a bit.

Also these not as bass as bassy as other people made them sound like they would be, I actually was scared abit til I heard them. I jump in joy and put my AD700 in the closet in its box.

I got my HFI-780 for 167 new. from northen sound and light.

 

[DemonicLemming]

Quote:

Originally Posted by pfillion /img/forum/go_quote.gif I have never heard the stock 780 but I can tell you that I have never heard any form of sibilance with my ALO-780, and it's coming from someone who is really sensible to this problem. (I had this problem in the past with the DT990 and the Grado 325i) Unfortunately, recabling these headphones seems to be a necessity but the end result is a fantastic pair of headphones. (Probably 90% of the Edition 9 !)

No sibilance in my stock 780s....my ears are quite sensitive to high frequency noises, and while the highs are crisp, they're not sibilant.

 

[milezone]

I agree the ultrasone is a headphone that you either love or hate (pretty much true across the range of products). If you have a sensitivity for sibilance, and prefer sound that originates and exists in intangible space rather than in a physical realm (i.e. dislike heavy bass), then steer clear of ultrasones at all costs. Also the Pro 750s are not as 'musical' as some other more neutral phones as they have a recessed midrange (a product of low and high boost). However, what they lack in midrange they make up for in instrument layering. Unlike some hps which imo separate the instruments too much, the pro750s layer them very naturally making the music more harmonic and fluid (thus more engaging). Elaborating on this further, I sense that people assume that without instrument separation, it is impossible experience nuances and detail. After listening to the 750s I think you will find this is not the case. That being said, they are not vocal oriented headphones. Meaning they preform better with instrumentation music due to their ability to layer the music. If you listen you will understand what i mean. If this makes my thoughts any clearer, I loved the 750s I eventually purchased the ed9s. Of the headphones I own, these two are the most resolving.

Unfortunately I haven't heard the 780s. If the midrange issue with the 750s is not present with the 780s then I suggest you go that route. Also know what you want in your headphone because like many people in this forum, ultrasones may not be for you. On that note, there is a general attitude towards ultrasone which is certainly valid. Many people (some of whom are ignorant) in this forum who have become accustomed to the sennheiser beyer sound, disregard ultrasone as colored, or unnatural. Know that they certainly have a sound that is unconventional compared to other headphones. It is not necessarily an unnatural one (as the ed9s are perhaps the most natural sound [not to be confused with neutrality] headphones I own). I can tell you that to my ears, the ultrasone sound (the ed9s) is far superior/more enjoyable than that of the other headphones I own. It took some getting used to but has been totally worth it.

Just a reminder if my rambling has fatigued you, if the 780s (which I havent heard) have more midrange (sound more like the ed9s) than the 750s I would go that route. Good luck.

 

[cyanbomb]

Quote:

Originally Posted by milezone /img/forum/go_quote.gif I agree the ultrasone is a headphone that you either love or hate (pretty much true across the range of products). If you have a sensitivity for sibilance, and prefer sound that originates and exists in intangible space rather than in a physical realm (i.e. dislike heavy bass), then steer clear of ultrasones at all costs. Also the Pro 750s are not as 'musical' as some other more neutral phones as they have a recessed midrange (a product of low and high boost). However, what they lack in midrange they make up for in instrument layering. Unlike some hps which imo separate the instruments too much, the pro750s layer them very naturally making the music more harmonic and fluid (thus more engaging). Elaborating on this further, I sense that people assume that without instrument separation, it is impossible experience nuances and detail. After listening to the 750s I think you will find this is not the case. That being said, they are not vocal oriented headphones. Meaning they preform better with instrumentation music due to their ability to layer the music. If you listen you will understand what i mean. If this makes my thoughts any clearer, I loved the 750s I eventually purchased the ed9s. Of the headphones I own, these two are the most resolving. Unfortunately I haven't heard the 780s. If the midrange issue with the 750s is not present with the 780s then I suggest you go that route. Also know what you want in your headphone because like many people in this forum, ultrasones may not be for you. On that note, there is a general attitude towards ultrasone which is certainly valid. Many people (some of whom are ignorant) in this forum who have become accustomed to the sennheiser beyer sound, disregard ultrasone as colored, or unnatural. Know that they certainly have a sound that is unconventional compared to other headphones. It is not necessarily an unnatural one (as the ed9s are perhaps the most natural sound [not to be confused with neutrality] headphones I own). I can tell you that to my ears, the ultrasone sound (the ed9s) is far superior/more enjoyable than that of the other headphones I own. It took some getting used to but has been totally worth it. Just a reminder if my rambling has fatigued you, if the 780s (which I havent heard) have more midrange (sound more like the ed9s) than the 750s I would go that route. Good luck.

Thanks everyone for your thoughts. Milezone, the more I read, the more confused I am, and am beginning to be convinced that I should just bite the bullet and fork out the cash for Edition 9's. There are so many mixed feelings about the HFI-780s (some say it's awesome, others say boomy, overblown bass), and the Pro750s (amazing, wonderful, sibilant, not sibilant, horrible, etc); nobody dislikes their Edition 9's right?

How much did you guys pay for the Ed 9's?

 

[YtseJamer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cyanbomb /img/forum/go_quote.gif How much did you guys pay for the Ed 9's?

$1080

 

[iQEM]

Quote:

Originally Posted by analogbox /img/forum/go_quote.gif I had a choice between 780 and 580 and I eventually chose 580 because IMO it looks cooler. But, I'm curious to try 780 too since I was pleasantly surprised by the performance 580 is putting out at such a low price range. I wonder how close 780 can get to sound like ED. 9 since many people are claiming that they can sound very close due to utilizing the same drivers.

tommorrow i would have a chance to do some test A/B to ALO HFI780 (friend of mine has it), then i'll share what i found on our thread 580's...so analogbox, keep checking the thread...

Quote:

Originally Posted by pfillion /img/forum/go_quote.gif They don't have the same drivers but the position of the drivers is very similar on both phones.

so basically if you move the driver of PL750 to HFI780 enclosure, you'll get ED9...right ?

Quote:

Originally Posted by analogbox /img/forum/go_quote.gif My bad. Turns out it's the PL750 that share the same driver as ED. 9. I guess having different housing has a lot to do with sonic differences than the type of drivers. I do think ED. 9 is a little too much money for what it is.

x2, it's too much for me too...

Quote:

Originally Posted by pfillion /img/forum/go_quote.gif I agree with you but thank god since I got my Edition 9, I have stopped my quest for something better. My wallet and my wife are now happy.

so now you do believe that ALO HFI780 are 90% of Ed9 ?

Quote:

Originally Posted by genclaymore /img/forum/go_quote.gif I got my HFI-780 for 167 new. from northen sound and light.

oh my...what a steal !

 

[Peter Pinna]

Quote:

Originally Posted by analogbox /img/forum/go_quote.gif You completely misunderstood me. Nowhere in my sentence did I mention the treble extension is bad nor PL750 is bad nor any instruments on PL750 sounds bad. I don't know where you got that idea but I'm a fan of Ultrasones and extended high seems like a characteristic of ultrasone. I have two of them (well, I just sold one) and, by others impression on 780, majority mention harsh sibilant on their phones so I assumed it is common for ultrasone phones. Everyone has different opinions about sonic differences. Just because you are a little more prone to harsh sibilant doesn't mean it will be the same for all other people so you shouldn't bash people for having different opinions. What I simply meant was that I did not find MS-2i being sibilant at all but since Ultrasones, at least my phones, have more extended treble than MS-2i, OP may not find Ultrasone phones enjoyable. I personally like brighter phones for rock music. (="rawk") I'm sorry if I wasn't clear on my statements but maybe you can ask me to clarify first before assuming anything I said? Edit: Also, would you care to explain this part? Because I've never bashed PL750 in any other posts other than posting about it's characteristic based on my opinion or compared to other phones. I personally really enjoyed my pair of PL750 and there is no reason why I'd do that. If I remember correctly, I think it wasn't long ago that you acquired your pair of PL750. Tell me, what makes your statement any more accurate than what you think I said?

My apologies are offered if I misunderstood you. For some reason, Apparently, I'm having a difficult time understanding you. I didn't really assume anything. We apparently have different ways of communicating or something else is wrong because, I swear, in reading your posts it seems obvious to me that you are making complaints about certain aspects of the Proline 750's. If you are not, that's fine. I read your words and to me they come across as complaining. I guess that's wrong but it sure is weird that I perceive your words the way I do. I thought I understood the messages you were conveying but apparently I didn't.
To try to better understand you about one thing (as only one example), are you saying that Ultrasone headphones have extended highs and you think that's a good thing? Is that correct? I thought you were saying it was a bad thing.
In actuality, the Proline 750's do not have extended highs, IMO. They have very accurate highs, IMO.
You can look at charts which seem to indicate the extension you refer to but what you have to realize is that "normal human hearing" is not charted as "flat" and there are certain "peaks" and "depths" as there are (no, it is not exactly the same) in high end headphones, as I have come to understand this information.
I have had a vast amount of experience in communications and, I swear, the tone of your posts comes across, to me, as though you are complaining about certain aspects of the Proline 750's performance (although you did say at one point that you liked the Proline 750's which seemed like a contradiction to almost everything else you were saying). I will have to make a habit when communicating with you to attempt to better understand exactly what it is you are really saying because apparently what I have been understanding you to say is not what you are saying at all.

I never "bashed" you in my last post to you. If you think I did, then we really do have different ways of communicating.
Once again, I offer my apologies if I misunderstood you which apparently, according to what you wrote, I did.

 

[Peter Pinna]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cyanbomb /img/forum/go_quote.gif Thanks everyone for your thoughts. Milezone, the more I read, the more confused I am, and am beginning to be convinced that I should just bite the bullet and fork out the cash for Edition 9's. There are so many mixed feelings about the HFI-780s (some say it's awesome, others say boomy, overblown bass), and the Pro750s (amazing, wonderful, sibilant, not sibilant, horrible, etc); nobody dislikes their Edition 9's right? How much did you guys pay for the Ed 9's?

Yes, there are some who can't stand the sound of the Ed 9's. I have never heard the Ed 9's so, obviously, I have no opinion on them.
I have a great deal of experience with the Proline 750's. I'm not going to say much more than I've already said about them. What I will say is, IMO:
The Proline 750's absolutely do not have recessed mids;
The Proline 750's absolutely do not have boosted highs, "metalic" highs or boosted lows;
The Proline 750's are accurate, highly musical headphones;
The Proline 750's are an excellent headphone for listening to either vocal or instrumental music of all types. They especially excel at classical and jazz.
Try to go to a store that demos them and judge for yourself because you are never going to read a unanimous opinion in these forums.

 

[analogbox]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Pinna /img/forum/go_quote.gif My apologies are offered if I misunderstood you. For some reason, Apparently, I'm having a difficult time understanding you. I didn't really assume anything. We apparently have different ways of communicating or something else is wrong because, I swear, in reading your posts it seems obvious to me that you are making complaints about certain aspects of the Proline 750's. If you are not, that's fine. I read your words and to me they come across as complaining. I guess that's wrong but it sure is weird that I perceive your words the way I do. I thought I understood the messages you were conveying but apparently I didn't. To try to better understand you about one thing (as only one example), are you saying that Ultrasone headphones have extended highs and you think that's a good thing? Is that correct? I thought you were saying it was a bad thing. In actuality, the Proline 750's do not have extended highs, IMO. They have very accurate highs, IMO. You can look at charts which seem to indicate the extension you refer to but what you have to realize is that "normal human hearing" is not charted as "flat" and there are certain "peaks" and "depths" as there are (no, it is not exactly the same) in high end headphones, as I have come to understand this information. I have had a vast amount of experience in communications and, I swear, the tone of your posts comes across, to me, as though you are complaining about certain aspects of the Proline 750's performance (although you did say at one point that you liked the Proline 750's which seemed like a contradiction to almost everything else you were saying). I will have to make a habit when communicating with you to attempt to better understand exactly what it is you are really saying because apparently what I have been understanding you to say is not what you are saying at all. I never "bashed" you in my last post to you. If you think I did, then we really do have different ways of communicating. Once again, I offer my apologies if I misunderstood you which apparently, according to what you wrote, I did.

Apology taken.

I am indeed somewhat handicapped when it comes to using correct grammar and sentencing so don't feel too sorry for my lack of literature.

I do think their mid is a little too recessed on PL750 even with the "correct" placement. But that's about the only complain I had with PL750. What I meant by extended highs derive from comparing it to other reference phones I have. For example, on my HD600, cymbals sound detailed and clear but on PL750 it sounded somewhat mushed all together. Normally, lower treble lets you hear the impact of the cymbals and higher treble taking over the shaking part, but rather than sounding detailed and clear, PL750's treble sounds rather aggressive and empathized. It's not necessarily a bad thing because it's that aggressive high that makes overdriven guitars sound crunchy and powerful. Now I can safely say that my 580 have even more extended highs than PL750 but I love it because it really does reproduce that crunchy guitar tones close to that of real thing.

Did I have complains on my PL750? Sure. No headphones are perfect and every headphones have goods and bads. I could've said a thing or two here and there but I never bashed it because frankly I really liked the thing.

I can help but wonder though, what do you mean by human hearings not being flat. Not that I disagree or anything but this is something I never heard of. Do you mind telling us where you based this fact upon?

 

[Peter Pinna]

Quote:

Originally Posted by analogbox /img/forum/go_quote.gif Apology taken. I am indeed somewhat handicapped when it comes to using correct grammar and sentencing so don't feel too sorry for my lack of literature. I do think their mid is a little too recessed on PL750 even with the "correct" placement. But that's about the only complain I had with PL750. What I meant by extended highs derive from comparing it to other reference phones I have. For example, on my HD600, cymbals sound detailed and clear but on PL750 it sounded somewhat mushed all together. Normally, lower treble lets you hear the impact of the cymbals and higher treble taking over the shaking part, but rather than sounding detailed and clear, PL750's treble sounds rather aggressive and empathized. It's not necessarily a bad thing because it's that aggressive high that makes overdriven guitars sound crunchy and powerful. Now I can safely say that my 580 have even more extended highs than PL750 but I love it because it really does reproduce that crunchy guitar tones close to that of real thing. Did I have complains on my PL750? Sure. No headphones are perfect and every headphones have goods and bads. I could've said a thing or two here and there but I never bashed it because frankly I really liked the thing. I can help but wonder though, what do you mean by human hearings not being flat. Not that I disagree or anything but this is something I never heard of. Do you mind telling us where you based this fact upon?

I don't know for sure that it is a fact, it is merely an understanding I have based on having seen charts in the past detailing the frequency range of human hearing. I'm no expert on the human ear or it's ability to hear so the information I have been given about this could be wrong. However, according to my understanding, human hearing (when shown on a chart) depicts high and low points in the chart that are supposed to be representative of the way the so called "average person" hears. The chart does not show a straight flat line.
This, I understand, is the reason that headphones are designed with somewhat similar highs and lows in an attempt to possibly match how the human ear hears.
I have no problem if someone who knows more than I do about this information corrects anything I've written here. As I stated previously, these ideas are simply what I've come to understand and I could have misunderstood or the information could have been incorrect.

Analogbox, your opinion about the mids being a little recessed is understood (I think) and appreciated even though I disagree with that opinion. I have heard headphones with more prominent mids than the Pro 750's, and to me they sound like they have exaggerated mids.
I've run into a somewhat similar challenge occasionally in some of the recording productions in which I've been involved. What I'm referring to has to do with how loud a vocalist or a featured instrumentalist should be in comparison to the other instruments in an orchestra. It's a matter of personal taste on the part of the producer. I'm sure you can hear what I mean simply by listening to different recordings of vocalists with an orchestra. There are some where the vocalist's voice is more prominent and some less so. You, as the listener, might think the vocalist's voice is either too loud or too soft.
The same is true for headphones. You might think that a mid frequency sounds just right and I might think it is exaggerated or you might think that a mid frequency is too soft and I might think it is just right.
What really counts, I suppose, in the final analysis, is how does the sound of the headphones audio output sound in comparison to the sound of the audio as it is played through high quality studio monitors? This info is also true for all of the other frequencies, as I'm sure you know. Does the "mix" and frequencies sound through headphones as they do when playing through high quality studio monitors?
I agree that no headphone is perfect, not even (and you and everyone else are probably not going to believe I'm writing this) the Pro 750's. But (and this is a big "but"), of the headphones I've heard, they are the closest thing to a perfect sounding headphone, I've ever heard. More than any other headphone I've heard, they most closely match the audio output of high quality studio monitors, IMO.
What I look for in headphones is as little alteration of the sound of the original recording as possible. The AKG K 701's are a very accurate headphone. I would like them more if their low end frequencies were stronger because to my ears, that area sounds weak. Yes, I agree with what I think you were saying and that is there is such a thing as too much articulation. To my ears, everything sounds just right on the Proline 750's.
Right now, I'm listening to a live performance recording of Count Basie and his Orchestra. If you're not familiar with this organization, it was a very popular Jazz big band consisting of (I think) 18 musicians. The drummer, Sonny Payne, was a very showy and sometimes intricate player. I am hearing everything he and all of the other instruments are doing very well through the Proline 750's. In no way does it sound at all "mushy", IMO. It sounds like I'm there.
By the way, if you like big band Jazz, I suggest you get this recording. It's called "Count Basie Live at the Sands (before Frank)". The "(before Frank)" refers to a concert they did with Frank Sinatra which followed their instrumentals. The Frank Sinatra concert is also a great "live" performance recording. It's called "Frank Sinatra live at the Sands with Count Basie and his Orchestra". Both of these recordings were recorded in 1966 and they both sound fantastic when played via the Pro 750's.

 

[YtseJamer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by iQEM /img/forum/go_quote.gif so now you do believe that ALO HFI780 are 90% of Ed9 ?

Yes, they have a similar sound signature but it's easier for me to appreciate the extra refinement of the Edition 9 since I got my new amp. (Little Dot MKV Dual Mono SS) I now understand why some people prefer a solid state amp for the Edition 9.